Let's become adults when it comes to racing bicycles.

I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

The riders can use whatever performance enhancers they
desire to use. They can genetically engineer themselves
whatever way they wish. They can augment themselves
with any non-external powered devices they wish.

How long is cycling going to be held back in the relative
dark ages with all the nonsensical rules and regulations
that exist today? The sport is going to stagnate and die if
changes are not made to make it more interesting and
less bureaucratic. What it is now is an extension of
bureaucratic dictates. Why, a professional cyclist must
be a freaking politician first and a rider last. Sad.

--
Willy Free

On 24/10/2012 22:23, Free Willy wrote:

The riders can use whatever performance enhancers they
desire to use.

No they can't. There are laws, not just "rules", covering most such
"aids" nowadays. Or are you saying cyclists should be exempt from the
law of whichever land they find themselves in? Either way, this is a
non-starter...

UD

Free Willy wrote:
I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

Track bikes don't have brakes.

The riders can use whatever performance enhancers they
desire to use.

Isn't that what everyone's been complaining about?

How long is cycling going to be held back in the relative
dark ages with all the nonsensical rules and regulations
that exist today? The sport is going to stagnate and die if
changes are not made to make it more interesting and
less bureaucratic. What it is now is an extension of
bureaucratic dictates. Why, a professional cyclist must
be a freaking politician first and a rider last. Sad.

Auto racing in its various forms is very popular and has lots of rules
about what you can and cannot do - you can't just make the fastest car
possible and race it professionally. IOW, the rules aren't the problem.

-S-

"Steve Freides" wrote in message
...
Free Willy wrote:
I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

Track bikes don't have brakes.

True, but I was talking about the Tour de France where brakes
are necessary. Imagine descending a mountain in close
company without brakes?


The riders can use whatever performance enhancers they
desire to use.

Isn't that what everyone's been complaining about?

How long is cycling going to be held back in the relative
dark ages with all the nonsensical rules and regulations
that exist today? The sport is going to stagnate and die if
changes are not made to make it more interesting and
less bureaucratic. What it is now is an extension of
bureaucratic dictates. Why, a professional cyclist must
be a freaking politician first and a rider last. Sad.

Auto racing in its various forms is very popular and has lots of rules about
what you can and cannot do - you can't just make the fastest car possible
and race it professionally. IOW, the rules aren't the problem.


I say the rules ARE the problem. The rules cause the sport to be perverted. It
causes the sport to become just another pursuit where 'affirmative action'
rules the roost, where a large bureaucracy warps the outcome.

In other words, limiting the abilities of a professional athlete exists for
the express purpose of allowing those athletes who are less able to be
competitive. It discriminates against the better athletes. The only way to
level the playing field to make it fair for all athletes is to do away with
the rules. That way some crybaby like Greg LeMond won't be able to blame his
defeats other athletes who kicked his ass by calling them dopers. Doping
should be an option. Choice of bicycle configuration should be an option, if
recumbents are really faster than allow every cyclist to use a recumbent.
Allow aerodynamic fairings, allow the Superman position. Just get rid of all
the rules and see how the sport progresses.

Whereas with all the rules an Tour de France leg average might be 27mph. I bet
if anything was allowed this average could well be bumped up to 40mph. Instead
of watching athletes crippled by rules one would be able to watch athletes
unfettered by the rules that cripples out of them.

In auto racing (a true team sport) many of the rules discriminate against the
best mechanics, for example. A savvy, experienced mechanic on the team might
know several ways to make the car faster but he can't because of all the
rules. They claim the rules are for safety and all that crap but the bottom
line is the rules exist so the less-able are more able to be competitive. It's
like an extension of public education where the bright kids in the class
suffer because the class has to slow down so the dim bulbs can better keep up.

It's liberalism gone wild. It's sad that professional sports are ruled by
liberalism. It's anathema to sport.

--
Willy Free

On 25/10/2012 19:12, Free Willy wrote:
"Steve wrote in message
...
Free Willy wrote:
I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

Track bikes don't have brakes.

True, but I was talking about the Tour de France where brakes
are necessary. Imagine descending a mountain in close
company without brakes?

You should try it, the outcome could only be desireable.

It's liberalism gone wild. It's sad that professional sports are ruled by
liberalism. It's anathema to sport.

Jesus, you raise stupidity to an art form.

"atriage" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 25/10/2012 19:12, Free Willy wrote:
"Steve wrote in message
...
Free Willy wrote:

I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

Track bikes don't have brakes.

True, but I was talking about the Tour de France where brakes are
necessary. Imagine descending a mountain in close company without brakes?

You should try it, the outcome could only be desireable.

It's liberalism gone wild. It's sad that professional sports are ruled by
liberalism. It's anathema to sport.

Jesus, you raise stupidity to an art form.

You should try becoming an adult when it comes to posting to Usenet . . .

--
Willy Free

Free wrote:
"atriage" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 25/10/2012 19:12, Free Willy wrote:
"Steve wrote in message
...
Free Willy wrote:

I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

Track bikes don't have brakes.

True, but I was talking about the Tour de France where brakes are
necessary. Imagine descending a mountain in close company without brakes?

You should try it, the outcome could only be desireable.

It's liberalism gone wild. It's sad that professional sports are ruled by
liberalism. It's anathema to sport.

Jesus, you raise stupidity to an art form.
You should try //SLAP
Says the ball gargling fantasist pro-cyclist with imaginary inside information.


--
Android Usenet Reader
http://android.newsgroupstats.hk

Free Willy wrote:
"Steve Freides" wrote in message
...
Free Willy wrote:
I say it's about time men became men when it comes
to racing bicycles professionally.

There should be one rule and one rule only: First man
over the finish line, after having completed the entire
course, is the winner.

It shouldn't matter what kind of bike he's riding, what
the frame geometry looks like, what it weighs, etc.
The only thing that it must have is two wheels, brakes
and no other source of power other than the rider's body.

Track bikes don't have brakes.

True, but I was talking about the Tour de France where brakes
are necessary. Imagine descending a mountain in close
company without brakes?

You could do it, you'd just need a low enough gear - wouldn't be much
fun for racing, I'll have to admit. My townie fixed gear bike sports a
59" gear and I have only touched the brakes in emergencies - I can slow
down, even on some pretty steep hills here, enough otherwise.

The riders can use whatever performance enhancers they
desire to use.

Isn't that what everyone's been complaining about?

How long is cycling going to be held back in the relative
dark ages with all the nonsensical rules and regulations
that exist today? The sport is going to stagnate and die if
changes are not made to make it more interesting and
less bureaucratic. What it is now is an extension of
bureaucratic dictates. Why, a professional cyclist must
be a freaking politician first and a rider last. Sad.

Auto racing in its various forms is very popular and has lots of
rules about what you can and cannot do - you can't just make the
fastest car possible and race it professionally. IOW, the rules
aren't the problem.

I say the rules ARE the problem. The rules cause the sport to be
perverted. It causes the sport to become just another pursuit where
'affirmative action' rules the roost, where a large bureaucracy warps
the outcome.
In other words, limiting the abilities of a professional athlete
exists for the express purpose of allowing those athletes who are
less able to be competitive. It discriminates against the better
athletes. The only way to level the playing field to make it fair for
all athletes is to do away with the rules. That way some crybaby like
Greg LeMond won't be able to blame his defeats other athletes who
kicked his ass by calling them dopers. Doping should be an option.
Choice of bicycle configuration should be an option, if recumbents
are really faster than allow every cyclist to use a recumbent. Allow
aerodynamic fairings, allow the Superman position. Just get rid of
all the rules and see how the sport progresses.
Whereas with all the rules an Tour de France leg average might be
27mph. I bet if anything was allowed this average could well be
bumped up to 40mph. Instead of watching athletes crippled by rules
one would be able to watch athletes unfettered by the rules that
cripples out of them.
In auto racing (a true team sport) many of the rules discriminate
against the best mechanics, for example. A savvy, experienced
mechanic on the team might know several ways to make the car faster
but he can't because of all the rules. They claim the rules are for
safety and all that crap but the bottom line is the rules exist so
the less-able are more able to be competitive. It's like an extension
of public education where the bright kids in the class suffer because
the class has to slow down so the dim bulbs can better keep up.
It's liberalism gone wild. It's sad that professional sports are
ruled by liberalism. It's anathema to sport.

The other person's comments about raising stupidity to an art form - I'm
tempted to agree. You've managed to work affirmative action into a
conversation about bike racing rules and the rest of what you've got to
say is nonsense.

-S-

On 25/10/2012 23:13, atriage wrote:

snip that suckah

It's liberalism gone wild. It's sad that professional sports are
ruled by liberalism. It's anathema to sport.

Jesus, you raise stupidity to an art form.
You should try //SLAP
Says the ball gargling fantasist pro-cyclist with imaginary inside
information.

You'll note he avoided answering my point about there being actual laws
against drugs, though I have to admit they're not exactly consistent
across borders.

I remember r.b.r. when Lance Armstrong was a promising young rider and
most yanks never even knew what a ****ing bicycle was. Ah, halcyon days
of yore...

UD

"Uncle Dave" wrote in message
...

[trim]

You'll note he avoided answering my point about there being actual laws
against drugs, though I have to admit they're not exactly consistent across
borders.


You aren't the truest rim in the spare wheel rack, dude.

Drug laws aren't enforced by cyclists. Such laws are enforced
by law enforcement authorities. If one sees somebody breaking
a law the only viable option is to inform law enforcement right
away. Some Rube who is either jealous, bribed or sociopathic
can, years later, point a finger and claim, "Hey, I say that guy
doping." That will earn him a chuckle any law enforcement officer.

Yet, the Nazi wannabe UCI/WADA doesn't even question it.
They blindly accept such belated claims without question. Sadly,
there are all too many, uninformed and vindictive psychopaths
like yourself who think a Kangaroo Court like this is just ducky.
Sad! So, grow up and please see a shrink so he can work on
ridding you of your insane and Gestapo-like attitude before
everybody is rounded up and prosecuted on the basis of
hearsay.


--
Willy Free